CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal
...This Court’s ruling will be precedent over matters in
the Fourth District affecting 72,750 charter school students
and parents (including over 21,000 in Palm Beach County)
and millions of public dollars per year. Id. While House Bill
7123 (2019) amended section 1011.71(9), Florida Statutes, to
codify the requirement that school boards share voted
operating millage revenues with charter schools going
forward, this legislative “fix” does not provide a remedy to
Appellants because they were approve...
...Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.330(a)(2)(C):
Are local school boards required under section
1002.33(17), Florida Statutes, to share with public
charter schools revenues generated from a voted
operating millage levied pursuant to section
1011.71(9),
Florida Statutes, which was approved by voters prior to
July 1, 2019?
For the reasons argued above, we grant appellants’ motion for rehearing
en banc, withdraw this court’s 2-1 affirmance opinion issued April 22,
2020, and substitute the following reversal opinion in its place....
...The circuit court later entered a final judgment in the school
board’s favor, prompting this appeal.
We conclude the 2018 referendum’s exclusion of charter schools
violated Florida law, as explained below.
A. Interpreting sections
1002.33(17) and
1011.71(9) in harmony
according to plain meaning favors the charter schools’ position.
The method by which students enrolled in charter schools are funded,
and the sources from which such funding is derived, are provided in
Section
1002.33(1...
...divided by total funded weighted full-time equivalent students
in the school district; multiplied by the weighted full-time
equivalent students for the charter school. . . .
§
1002.33(17)(b), Fla. Stat. (2018) (emphasis added).
Section
1011.71, Florida Statutes (2018), titled “District school tax,”
describes the sources from which “funds from the school district’s
operating discretionary millage levy” may be generated....
...VII of the State Constitution.
. . . Funds generated by such additional millage . . . must not
be incorporated in the calculation of any hold-harmless or
other component of the Florida Education Finance Program
formula in any year. . . .
§ 1011.71(1), (9), Fla. Stat. (2018) (emphasis added).
Both sections 1011.71(1) and (9) use the words “may levy” to describe
how a school district may increase its operating millage above the required
operating millage also described in section 1011.71(1). That is, a school
board “may levy” an increased operating millage by its own vote under
section 1011.71(1), or a school board “may levy” an increased operating
millage by voting to place an increased operating millage on the ballot and
obtaining voter approval under section 1011.71(9)....
...Trazenfeld,
833 So. 2d 734, 738 (Fla. 2002)
(“The word ‘may’ when given its ordinary meaning denotes a permissive
term rather than the mandatory connotation of the word ‘shall.’”).
Because the increased operating millages permitted by sections
1011.71(1) and (9) are both discretionary, and because a school district’s
“current operating discretionary millage levy” is to be included in the
method of funding students enrolled in a charter school under section
1002.33(17)(b), the 2018 re...
...3d 1220, 1234 (Fla.
2009) (“[W]e give full effect to all statutory provisions and construe related
statutory provisions in harmony with one another.”) (citation and internal
quotation marks omitted).
B. The school board’s arguments lack merit.
1. The school board misinterprets sections
1002.33(17) and
1011.71(9) as providing two distinct funding mechanisms. The
sections are related and must be read in harmony.
-7-
The school board argues sections
1002.33(17) and
1011.71(9) provide
two distinct funding mechanisms and, therefore, section
1002.33(17) has
no application to the instant case. According to the school board,
“[g]eneral funding for charter schools under [section
1002.33(17)(b)]
includes a mandatory requirement that [Florida Education Finance
Program] funds be distributed to charter schools,” but section
1011.71(9)
explicitly states “additional millage for school operational purposes”
generated after a local referendum or general election “do not become part
of the calculation of the Florida Education Finance Program.”
The flaw in...
...district’s current operating
discretionary millage levy.”
As explained in Section A above, “funds from the school district’s
current operating discretionary millage levy” include increased operating
millages permitted by both sections 1011.71(1) and (9).
2....
...be funded as if they are in a
basic program or a special program, the same as students enrolled in
other public schools in the school district.” (emphasis added).
3. Contrary to both sides’ arguments, the Legislature’s 2019
amendment of section 1011.71(9) should not affect our
interpretation of the 2018 version of section 1011.71(9).
In 2019, the Legislature amended section 1011.71(9) to add the
following language shown in bold:
(9) In addition to the maximum millage levied under this
section and the General Appropriations Act, a school district
may levy, by local referendum or in a general el...
...enrollment and used in a manner consistent with the
- 12 -
purposes of the levy. The referendum must contain an
explanation of the distribution methodology consistent
with the requirements of this subsection.
§ 1011.71(9), Fla. Stat. (2019) (emphasis added).
According to appellants, the 2019 Legislature’s addition of the bolded
sentences was meant to clarify the Legislature’s intent for the 2018
referendum’s approved millage increase under section 1011.71(9) “to be
shared with public charter schools all along.” In support, appellants cite
several Florida Supreme Court cases, including Matthews v....
...of Indian River Cnty., Case No. 31-2016-CA-000432 (Fla. 19th
Cir. Ct. June 13, 2017) (circuit court held the Indian River County School
Board was required to share voted millage levy revenues with charter
schools). Thus, appellants argue, the Legislature’s 2019 amendment to
section 1011.71(9) was meant to clarify that “[i]t was the intent of the
Legislature all along for Voted Millage funds to be shared with public
charter schools, even under the prior version of section 1011.71(9).”
On the other hand, the school board argues the 2019 Legislature’s
addition of the bolded sentences necessarily means those provisions did
not exist within the 2018 version of section 1011.71(9)....
...acted more than ten years
after the original act as a clarification of original intent[.]”).
In our opinion, rather than attempting to choose one viable statutory
construction canon over another in determining the 2019 amendment’s
effect on section 1011.71(9), we simply interpret the 2018 version of
section 1011.71(9) as written. If we had been called upon to interpret the
2018 version of section 1011.71(9) before the 2019 amendment, we would
have done so, using other statutory construction canons available for our
consideration.
Also contrary to the parties’ positions, the 2019 amendment’s prior
drafts or final bill analysis should not affect our interpretation of the 2018
version of section 1011.71(9)....
...2005) (Cantero, J., concurring in part and
dissenting in part) (proposing that “legislative staff analyses add nothing
to an investigation of legislative intent”).
Conclusion
In sum, our review is limited to the 2018 versions of sections
1002.33(17) and
1011.71(9), and how those statutes may be read in
harmony according to their plain meaning. The 2018 referendum, by
excluding charter schools from that portion of the current discretionary
operating millage levy provided in section
1011.71(9), violated section
1002.33(17)’s requirement that “[s]tudents enrolled in a charter school,
regardless of the sponsorship, shall be funded as if they are in a basic
- 14 -
program or a speci...
...s ability to seek appellate review of
this opinion, we certify to the Florida Supreme Court the following question
of great public importance:
Does a local referendum which levies additional millage for
school operational purposes under section
1011.71, Florida
Statutes (2018), but which includes only non-charter schools
in the referendum, violate section
1002.33(17), Florida
Statutes (2018) (“Students enrolled in a charter school,
regardless of the sponsor...
...unlawful, the majority has wielded the doctrine of severability to sever the
word “non-charter” from the referendum and hold that charter schools are
entitled to share in the tax proceeds. This act of judicial hocus pocus
disenfranchises the voters of Palm Beach County and violates section
1011.71(9), Florida Statutes, which requires voter approval for the tax to
be valid.
I. The Word “non-charter” Cannot Lawfully Be Severed From the
Referendum So That Charter Schools Receive Part of the Tax
Proceeds.
Section 1011.71(9), Florida Statutes (2018), requires voter approval “by
local referendum or in a general election” to validate the tax levy at issue
here....
...instead rewritten the referendum and pulled a bait-and-switch upon the
voters of Palm Beach County. By judicial fiat, the majority has imposed a
levy for the benefit of charter schools that the voters never approved “by
local referendum or in a general election” as required by section
1011.71(9).
II....
...It was a case of first impression. Thus, en banc
consideration is only appropriate if the case or issue is of “exceptional
importance.”
This case involved the political question of whether a referendum to
impose a discretionary millage for operational expenses under section
1011.71(9) had to include charter schools. The original panel held it did
not. In 2019, our Legislature amended section 1011.71(9), Florida
Statutes (2019), to require that charter schools be included in any future
referendum....
...Under the same natural reading of section
1002.33(17)(b), the
referendum-based millage cannot be part of the “current operating
discretionary millage levy” in section
1002.33(17)(b).
“Current operating discretionary millage levy” refers to the single levy
contemplated under section
1011.71(1). Notably, this phrase is used in
section
1002.33(17)(b) and section
1011.71(1), but not in section
1011.71(9). Compare §
1011.71(1), Fla. Stat. (2018) (“In addition to the
required local effort millage levy, each district school board may levy a
nonvoted current operating discretionary millage.”), with §
1011.71(9), Fla.
Stat....
.... Funds
generated by such additional millage do not become a part of the
calculation of the Florida Education Finance Program total potential funds
in 2001-2002 or any subsequent year.”).
The fact that the Legislature did not use the term in section
1011.71(9)
means that the “current operating discretionary millage levy” in section
1002.33(17)(b) does not include a separate “additional” millage levy
authorized under a referendum, which is expressly excluded from FEFP
funds. See §
1011.71(9), Fla....
...y lottery
funds[;] and funds from the school district’s current operating
discretionary millage levy; . . . .
§
1002.33(17)(b), Fla. Stat. (2018) (alterations in brackets to reflect the
majority’s revisions).
IV. Prior to 2019, Section
1011.71(9) Allowed for a Voted-millage
that Excluded Charter Schools.
Appellants argue section
1011.71(9) must require any voted millage to
include charter schools to be valid. They suggest the “express language of
section
1011.71(9) specifically contemplates that the voted millage is
combined with the nonvoted millage” and together make up a school
district’s total “current operating discretionary millage.” In support of
their position, appellants cite language in subsection (9) stating that “a
school district may levy . . . additional millage for school operational
purposes up to an amount that, when combined with nonvoted millage
levied under this section, does not exceed the 10-mill limit . . . .” §
1011.71(9), Fla....
...the overall
constitutional limit on total assessed millage.
This conclusion is supported by the fact that the language of section
1002.33(17)(b) predates the additional voted-upon millage in section
- 35 -
1011.71(9)....
...6 Therefore, at the time the funding provision of the charter
school statute was adopted, its reference to the “current operating
discretionary millage” could not have contemplated the voted-upon millage
because that subsection did not exist. That reference must have been
solely to the nonvoted millage, now codified at section 1011.71(1)....
...As the
circuit court observed, had the Legislature intended to include the
additional voted-upon millage as part of charter school funding, it could
have amended the charter school statute, but there was no amendment
when the voted-upon millage provision was enacted.
In fact, the voted millage levied under section 1011.71(9) is expressly
excluded from the FEFP calculation....
...ing discretionary millage”
that must be shared with the charter schools. The trial court properly
concluded the Charter Schools were not entitled to a share of the revenues
generated from the referendum on this basis.
V. The 2019 Amendment to Section 1011.71 Changed the law; it
did not Clarify the Law.
There is no merit to appellants’ argument that section 1011.71 should
be viewed as a clarification amidst a “growing controversy about whether
voted operating discretionary millage revenues must be shared with the
public charter schools.” The Florida Supreme Court has adopted a policy
of decl...
...6 The charter school statute was enacted in 1996 (previously section 228.056,
Florida Statutes) and is now codified at section
1002.33, Florida Statutes. The
additional voted-upon millage was enacted in 2001 (previously section 236.25(6),
Florida Statutes) and is now codified at section
1011.71(9), Florida Statutes.
- 36 -
Here, the pertinent provision regarding the voted-upon millage
remained unchanged from the time of its enactment in 2001 until July 1,
2019....
...amendment passed 18 years after the original enactment as a clarification
of the original enactment.
There are two other reasons why the amendment was not a
clarification. First, as the School Board notes, while the original version
of the House Bill proposing the amendment to section 1011.71(9) included
a section describing the proposed amendment as “amending and clarifying
the use of certain voted discretionary operating millages,” the final version
of the bill did not include the term “clarifying.” Fla....
...analyses add nothing to an investigation of legislative intent”).
Second, the Legislature ultimately did not adopt language which would
have made the amendment retroactive. An earlier version of the bill
proposing the amendment stated: “The provisions of this act relating to
ss.
1011.71 and
1002.33, Florida Statutes, amending and clarifying the
use of certain voted discretionary operating millages levied by school
districts, apply to revenues collected on or after July 1, 2019.”
(Emphasis added). However, Chapter 2019-42, Laws of Florida, Section
17, deleted the word “clarifying” and creates a prospective application only.
It states: “The provisions of this act relating to s.
1011.71, Florida Statutes,
amending the use of certain voted discretionary operating millages levied
by school districts, apply to such levies authorized by a vote of the
electors on or after July 1, 2019.” Ch. 2019-42 § 17, Laws of Fla.
(emphasis added). It is clear from the context of the sentence that all
provisions relating to section
1011.71, not just the portion pertaining to
the limited use of the funds, apply prospectively.
The amendment was a change in the law, not a clarification.
VI....
...the majority has also
rewritten section
1002.33(17)(b) so that charter school students shall be
funded in the same amount and from the same sources as students
enrolled in other public schools. But the statute doesn’t say that.
Prior to 2019, section
1011.71(9) allowed for a voted-millage that
excluded charter schools....
CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal
...______No
The referendum expressly excluded public charter schools from receiving
any revenues generated from the ad valorem tax. County voters approved
the referendum, which went into effect on July 1, 2019.
The 2018 Referendum was authorized by section 1011.71(9), Florida
Statutes (2018), which states:
In addition to the maximum millage levied under this section
and the General Appropriations Act, a school district may levy,
by local referendum or in a general election, a...
...a combined millage in excess of the 10-mill limit, any millage
levied pursuant to this subsection shall be considered to be
required local effort to the extent that the district millage
would otherwise exceed the 10-mill limit.
§ 1011.71(9), Fla. Stat. (2018) (emphasis added).
No language in section 1011.71(9), as it existed in 2018, requires that
funds generated by the referendum be distributed to charter schools....
...program teachers, and improve teacher pay.” This language falls under
the statutory requirement to use these funds “for school operational
purposes.” Id.
In this litigation, appellants have creatively attempted to rewrite both
the 2018 Referendum and section 1011.71(9)....
...proportionate share of the revenues generated by the 2018 Referendum
because: (A) section
1002.33(17), Florida Statutes (2018), requires that
public charter school students be funded the same as other public school
students; (B) the millage levy authorized under section
1011.71(9) is part
of the “current operating discretionary millage” that must be shared with
the charter schools; and (C) the passage of House Bill 7123 supports the
conclusion that the School Board is required to share the 2018
Referendum revenues....
...it does not mean that the funding amount or sources of funding are the
same. The circuit court did not err in determining that the Charter Schools
were not entitled to receive a portion of the proceeds from the 2018
Referendum on this basis.
The millage levy authorized under section
1011.71(9) is not part of
the “current operating discretionary millage” that must be shared
with the Charter Schools
Section
1002.33(17)(b), Florida Statutes, sets forth the sources of
funding for charter schools:...
...schools.
-6-
This argument fails for two reasons: (1) the phrase “current operating
discretionary millage levy” in section
1002.33(17)(b) refers solely to the
nonvoted discretionary millage levy authorized by section
1011.71(1); and
(2) the phrase “current operating discretionary millage levy” in section
1002.33(17)(b) refers to a source of funds which are a component of the
FEFP funds, and does not include the separate additional millage levy
authorized under section
1011.71(9), which is expressly excluded from the
FEFP funds. Each of these points is addressed in turn.
1. The phrase “Current Operating Discretionary Millage Levy”
in section
1002.33(17)(b) refers to the nonvoted discretionary
millage levy contemplated under section
1011.71(1)
The Legislature’s use of the phrase “current operating discretionary
millage” in section
1002.33(17)(b) refers to the single nonvoted
discretionary millage levy contemplated under section
1011.71(1), which
states:
1011.71 District School Tax
(1) If the district school tax is not provided in the General
Appropriations Act or the substantive bill implementing the
General Appropriations Act, each district school board
desiring to particip...
...In addition to
the required local effort millage levy, each district school
board may levy a nonvoted current operating
discretionary millage. The Legislature shall prescribe
annually in the appropriations act the maximum amount of
millage a district may levy.
§ 1011.71(1), Fla. Stat. (2018) (emphasis added).
-7-
This nonvoted discretionary millage levy is separate from the voted-
upon millage levy authorized under section 1011.71(9), 3 pursuant to
which the 2018 Referendum at issue was passed.
Again, as it existed in 2018, section 1011.71(9) provided:
(9) In addition to the maximum millage levied under this
section and the General Appropriations Act, a school district
may levy, by local referendum or in a general election,
additional millag...
...a combined millage in excess of the 10-mill limit, any millage
levied pursuant to this subsection shall be considered to be
required local effort to the extent that the district millage
would otherwise exceed the 10-mill limit.
§ 1011.71(9), Fla....
...ating millage”
and “voted district school operating millage” as separate and distinct categories.
§
200.001(3)(b),(c), Fla. Stat. (2018).
-8-
interpreted to refer to the additional voted-upon millage in section
1011.71(9).
This conclusion is supported by the fact that the language of section
1002.33(17)(b) predates the additional voted-upon millage in section
1011.71(9)....
...school statute was adopted, its reference to the “current operating
discretionary millage” could not have contemplated the voted-upon millage
because that subsection did not exist at that time; that reference must
have been solely to the nonvoted millage, now codified at section
1011.71(1)....
...As the circuit court observed, had the Legislature intended to
include the additional voted-upon millage as part of charter school
funding, it could have amended the charter school statute, but there was
no amendment when the voted-upon millage provision was enacted.
Appellants contend that the “express language of section 1011.71(9)
specifically contemplates that the voted millage is combined with the
nonvoted millage” and together make up a school district’s total “current
operating discretionary millage.” In support of their position, appellants
cite language in subsection (9) stating that “a school district may levy . . .
additional millage for school operational purposes up to an amount that,
when combined with nonvoted millage levied under this section, does
not exceed the 10-mill limit . . . .” § 1011.71(9), Fla....
...4 The charter school statute was enacted in 1996 (previously section 228.056,
Florida Statutes) and is now codified at section
1002.33, Florida Statutes. The
additional voted-upon millage was enacted in 2001 (previously section 236.25(6),
Florida Statutes) and is now codified at section
1011.71(9), Florida Statutes.
-9-
a component of the district’s FEFP funds and does not include the separate
“additional” millage levy authorized under section
1011.71(9), which is
expressly excluded from the FEFP funds....
...divided by total funded weighted full-time equivalent students
in the school district; multiplied by the weighted full-time
equivalent students for the charter school. . . .
§
1002.33(17)(b), Fla. Stat. (2018) (emphasis added).
Although section
1011.71(9) expressly states that revenues generated
pursuant to the voted-upon millage are excluded from the FEFP funds,
appellants contend that this clear legislative mandate has no bearing on
whether such revenues must be shared with public charter schools....
...refers to the nonvoted-upon discretionary millage levy and contemplates
its inclusion in the total amount of locally contributed funds:
(5) Discretionary millage compression supplement.--The
Legislature shall prescribe in the General Appropriations Act,
pursuant to s. 1011.71(1), the rate of nonvoted current
operating discretionary millage that shall be used to calculate
a discretionary millage compression supplement....
...also a
component of the district’s FEFP funds. A logical reading of section
1002.33(17)(b) compels the conclusion that each of the items listed after
the word “including” are all components of the FEFP.
Because a voted millage levied under section
1011.71(9) is excluded
from the FEFP calculation and charter school funding is based on the
FEFP, the millage levied pursuant to the 2018 Referendum in this case
was not part of the “current operating discretionary millage” that must be
shared with the charter schools. The trial court properly concluded that
the Charter Schools were not entitled to a share of the revenues generated
from the referendum on this basis.
The legislative history of section
1011.71(9) does not support
appellants’ assertion that the School Board is required to share the
2018 Referendum revenues
After appellants filed the underlying lawsuit, section
1011.71(9) was
amended to require that tax revenues generated by a voter-approved
referendum be distributed to charter schools:
(9) In addition to the maximum millage levied under this
section and the General Appropriations Act,...
...ime equivalent student
enrollment and used in a manner consistent with the
purposes of the levy. The referendum must contain an
explanation of the distribution methodology consistent with
the requirements of this subsection.
§ 1011.71(9), Fla....
...millage funds be shared with public charter schools all along.
We reject that contention because the legislative history does not
support it.
First, as the School Board notes, while the original version of the House
Bill proposing the amendment to section 1011.71(9) included a section
describing the proposed amendment as “amending and clarifying the use
of certain voted discretionary operating millages,” the final version of the
bill did not include the term “clarifying.” Fla....
...analyses add nothing to an investigation of legislative intent”).
Second, the Legislature ultimately did not adopt language which would
have made the amendment retroactive. An earlier version of the bill
proposing the amendment stated: “The provisions of this act relating to
ss.
1011.71 and
1002.33, Florida Statutes, amending and clarifying the
use of certain voted discretionary operating millages levied by school
districts, apply to revenues collected on or after July 1, 2019.”
(Emphasis added). However, Chapter 2019-42, Laws of Florida, Section
17, deleted the word “clarifying” and creates a prospective application only;
- 13 -
it states, “The provisions of this act relating to s.
1011.71, Florida Statutes,
amending the use of certain voted discretionary operating millages levied
by school districts, apply to such levies authorized by a vote of the
electors on or after July 1, 2019.” Ch. 2019-42 § 17, Laws of Fla.
(emphasis added). It is clear from the context of the sentence that all
provisions relating to section
1011.71, not just the portion pertaining to
the limited use of the funds, apply prospectively.
We reject appellants’ argument that section
1011.71 should be viewed
as a clarification amidst a “growing controversy about whether voted
operating discretionary millage revenues must be shared with the public
charter schools.” The Florida Supreme Court has adopted a policy of
decl...
...in this opinion.
Affirmed.
MAY, J., concurs.
GERBER, J., dissents with opinion.
GERBER, J., dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. By excluding charter schools from that portion
of the current discretionary operating millage levy permitted by section
1011.71(9), as approved by voters in the 2018 Referendum, the school
- 14 -
district is violating section
1002.33(17)’s requirement that “[s]tudents
enrolled in a charter school, regardless of the spo...
...quotation marks
omitted).
I would reverse the circuit court’s final judgment, and remand for the
circuit court to enter a new final judgment finding the 2018 Referendum
was illegal and therefore void.
A. Interpreting sections
1002.33(17) and
1011.71(9) in harmony
according to plain meaning favors the charter schools’ position.
The method by which students enrolled in charter schools are funded,
and the sources from which such funding is derived, are provided in
Section
1002.33(1...
...me equivalent students
in the school district; multiplied by the weighted full-time
equivalent students for the charter school. . . .
§
1002.33(17)(b), Fla. Stat. (2018) (emphases added).
- 15 -
Section
1011.71, Florida Statutes (2018), entitled “District school tax,”
describes the sources by which “funds from the school district’s operating
discretionary millage levy” may be generated....
...VII of the State Constitution.
. . . Funds generated by such additional millage . . . must not
be incorporated in the calculation of any hold-harmless or
other component of the Florida Education Finance Program
formula in any year. . . .
§ 1011.71(1), (9), Fla. Stat. (2018) (emphases added).
Both sections 1011.71(1) and (9) use the words “may levy” to describe
how a school district may increase its operating millage above the required
operating millage also described in section 1011.71(1). That is, a school
board “may levy” an increased operating millage by its own vote under
section 1011.71(1), or a school board “may levy” an increased operating
millage by voting to place an increased operating millage on the ballot and
obtaining voter approval under section 1011.71(9)....
...2002)
(“The word ‘may’ when given its ordinary meaning denotes a permissive
term rather than the mandatory connotation of the word ‘shall.’”).
- 16 -
Because the increased operating millages permitted by sections
1011.71(1) and (9) are both discretionary, and because a school district’s
“current operating discretionary millage levy” is to be included in the
method of funding students enrolled in a charter school under section
1002.33(17)(b), the school...
...2009) (“[W]e give full effect to all statutory provisions and
construe related statutory provisions in harmony with one another.”)
(citation and internal quotation marks omitted).
B. The school district’s arguments lack merit.
1. The school district misinterprets sections
1002.33(17) and
1011.71(9) as providing two distinct funding mechanisms. The
sections are related and must be read in harmony.
The school district argues sections
1002.33(17) and
1011.71(9) provide
two distinct funding mechanisms and, therefore, section
1002.33(17) has
no application to the instant case. According to the school district,
“[g]eneral funding for charter schools under [section
1002.33(17)(b)]
includes a mandatory requirement that [Florida Education Finance
Program] funds be distributed to charter schools,” but section
1011.71(9)
explicitly states “additional millage for school operational purposes”
generated after a local referendum or general election “do not become part
of the calculation of the Florida Education Finance Program.”
The flaw in...
...ct’s current operating
discretionary millage levy.”
As I have explained in Section A above, “funds from the school district’s
current operating discretionary millage levy” include increased operating
millages permitted by both sections 1011.71(1) and (9).
- 18 -
2....
...be funded as if they are in a
basic program or a special program, the same as students enrolled in
other public schools in the school district.” (emphasis added).
3. Contrary to both sides’ arguments, the Legislature’s 2019
amendment of section 1011.71(9) should not affect our
interpretation of the 2018 version of section 1011.71(9).
In 2019, the Legislature amended section 1011.71(9) to add the
following language shown in bold:
(9) In addition to the maximum millage levied under this
section and the General Appropriations Act, a school district
may levy, by local referendum or in a general el...
...ime equivalent student
enrollment and used in a manner consistent with the
purposes of the levy. The referendum must contain an
explanation of the distribution methodology consistent with
the requirements of this subsection.
§ 1011.71(9), Fla. Stat. (2019) (emphasis added).
According to the charter schools, the 2019 Legislature’s addition of the
bolded sentences was meant to clarify the Legislature’s intent for the 2018
Referendum’s approved millage increase under section 1011.71(9) “to be
shared with public charter schools all along.” In support, the charter
schools cite several Florida Supreme Court cases, including Matthews v.
State, 760 So....
...31- 2016-CA-000432 (Fla. 19th
Cir. Ct. June 13, 2017) (circuit court held the Indian River County School
Board was required to share voted millage levy revenues with charter
schools). Thus, the charter schools argue, the Legislature’s 2019
amendment to section 1011.71(9) was meant to clarify “[i]t was the intent
of the Legislature all along for Voted Millage funds to be shared with
public charter schools, even under the prior version of section
1011.71(9).”
- 22 -
On the other hand, the school district argues the 2019 Legislature’s
addition of the bolded sentences necessarily means those provisions did
not exist within the 2018 version of section 1011.71(9)....
...It would be absurd, however, to consider legislation enacted more
than ten years after the original act as a clarification of original intent[.]”).
In my opinion, rather than attempting to choose one viable statutory
construction canon over another in determining the 2019 amendment’s
effect on section 1011.71(9), we should simply interpret the 2018 version
of section 1011.71(9) as written. If we had been called upon to interpret
the 2018 version of section 1011.71(9) before the 2019 amendment, we
would have done so, using other statutory construction canons available
for our consideration.
Also contrary to the parties’ positions, the 2019 amendment’s prior
drafts or final bill analysis should not affect our interpretation of the 2018
version of section 1011.71(9)....
... in part and dissenting in part) (proposing that “legislative staff analyses
add nothing to an investigation of legislative intent”).
Conclusion
In sum, our review should be limited to the 2018 versions of sections
1002.33(17) and
1011.71(9), and how those statutes may be read in
harmony according to their plain meaning. In my opinion, by excluding
charter schools from that portion of the current discretionary operating
millage levy provided in section
1011.71(9), as approved by voters in the
2018 Referendum, the school district is violating section
1002.33(17)’s
requirement that “[s]tudents enrolled in a charter school, regardless of the
sponsorship, shall be funded as if they are in a...
